The god-faculty dilemma: challenges for reformed epistemology in the light of cognitive science

Reformed epistemology (RE) involves a view of knowledge of God which Kelly James Clark and Justin Barrett have brought cognitive science to bear on. They argue that the cognitive science of religion (CSR) indicates that we have a ‘god-faculty’, a notion employed by Alvin Plantinga. Plantinga contend...

Description complète

Enregistré dans:  
Détails bibliographiques
Auteur principal: Kvandal, Halvor (Auteur)
Type de support: Électronique Article
Langue:Anglais
Vérifier la disponibilité: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
En cours de chargement...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Publié: Taylor & Francis 2020
Dans: International journal of philosophy and theology
Année: 2020, Volume: 81, Numéro: 4, Pages: 404-422
Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés:B Science cognitive / Religion / Rationalité / Dieu
RelBib Classification:AE Psychologie de la religion
CF Christianisme et science
NBC Dieu
Sujets non-standardisés:B Cognitive Science
B Évolution
B HADD
B God
B Reformed Epistemology
B Debunking
Accès en ligne: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Description
Résumé:Reformed epistemology (RE) involves a view of knowledge of God which Kelly James Clark and Justin Barrett have brought cognitive science to bear on. They argue that the cognitive science of religion (CSR) indicates that we have a ‘god-faculty’, a notion employed by Alvin Plantinga. Plantinga contends that if there is a God, then we have a specialized god-faculty. Clark and Barrett, by contrast, focus on the empirical evidence and point to a different, less specialized faculty. This difference is significant for how RE and CSR relate. The paper argues that a dilemma arises for those who bring RE and CSR together. A choice must be made between two interpretations of the god-faculty. ‘God-faculty 1ʹ is a specialized system for forming theistic beliefs. Findings in CSR indicate that there is no such system. ‘God-faculty 2ʹ is an unrefined tendency to form beliefs in superhuman agents. This thesis has empirical support in CSR. However, this faculty is unable to deliver the epistemic goods needed for the immediate, non-inferential knowledge of God RE describes. This shows that those who combine central contentions in RE with current research in CSR face a dilemma from which it is hard to escape.
ISSN:2169-2335
Contient:Enthalten in: International journal of philosophy and theology
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2020.1753095